Legal Opinion
United States v. Swift
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Decided July 1, 2010No. 4:09CR00278-2-WRWPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
WM. R. WILSON, JR., District Judge.
Pending is Defendant’s Motion to Suppress (Doc. No. 94). The Prosecution has responded. 1 Oral arguments were held on April 15, 2010, 2 and supplemental briefs were submitted by the parties. 3 For the reasons set out below, Defendant’s Motion to Suppress is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
BACKGROUND
Defendant Silas Roynel Swift moves to suppress drug-related evidence found in his SUV and house. These are the facts: 4
On the afternoon of September 29, 2009, officers from Arkansas’s 16th Judicial District Drug Task Force got information from a…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Maryland v. GarrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Marks v. ClarkeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. MatishDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2016
- United States v. Adrian DunnCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2013
- Church of Universal Love & Music v. Fayette CountyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
- State v. PattersonCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2014
- United States v. FarleeDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2012